The human being is good and bad by nature.

The truth is that we live in a world where we like to eat popcorn while we scream, we like to enjoy from a privileged place watching how the circus burns with everything inside like the famous parable of Kierkegaard's clown, the story of this buffoon that the crowd told that there was a design and everyone thought it was a joke but why does this happen, where does this dark fascination of the human being come from?

We all lead in our nature to be competitive, it is not a capacity that we learned, it is rather something primitive, so life opened space, it evolved, but not only life has this virtue of transformation that brings out the best in animals and it also empowers it, for example, to run fast, to resist more damage, to live longer, to camouflage ourselves better, see better and in some species think better, which distances us quite a bit from the first primitive amoeba that gave rise to all the diversity of life that exists on the planet, but the other side of that nature is the Taoist principle of yin and yang life is capable of the best and also the worst.

There is a possible explanation for these phenomena, "the valley of the disturbing", that phenomenon that is of rejection or repulsion or fear among those similar to the human, without becoming human, is something indecipherable, because we see in the other characteristics similar to us, without being us and a feeling of aversion is activated, an almost almost impulse to destroy or attack that being, such as a zombie, then we see that there is a double competitiveness, an intrinsic competitiveness, which can be translated that we surpass ourselves ourselves and another extrinsic that is we overcome by sinking others.

You are going to see which of the two dimensions is the predominant one, intrinsic competitiveness gives the best fruits, but you have to work hard for it, on the other hand, extrinsic competitiveness gives mediocre fruits but we can enjoy them in life, we see a lot in cases of crisis, for example, there is not much food that we make, we get used to eating other inedible things or eating less or we kill those who eat the most, thus we eat more; And it is that when there is hunger and need, the most viable alternative is usually the second.

That friend who eats alone and does not want to invite you from his bread and ham, it is not that he is selfish but that his extrinsic competitiveness is activated, this double nature is more or less asleep in contemporary societies, where human life is more guaranteed, the more developed a civilization is, there is more food, there is more security, there is more possibility of mating with its kind, there is more access to goods and so on; then in these cases, in development extrinsic competitiveness disappears or rather takes shape in common crime, with which we can say by the way, that the more developed a society is, the more reduced its criminal spectrum, societies are less egalitarian or less than it is resources, education, justice, which tends to awaken the extrinsic competitiveness that takes shape in the famous - I steal because otherwise I would starve.

In Latin America, due to its level of development, it is a fallacy, since in some way any Latin American has food right now, at this point in the 21st century, but that on the other hand could be taken as a metaphor that implies another need related to quality of life, I steal, I kill, I violate, I corrupt, because I want to be equal to those who are on the privileged side of life, which is nothing more than I impose myself on the other, because it prioritized my right to a better life, I am stronger, I am more resistant, I am like weeds, since deep down we are all like that.